Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Mother of all abstractions

Expand Messages
  • Mary
    ... If time is the transcendental horizon of being, then being itself is never completed. Therefore, being cannot be a being in-itself. The only thing left
    Message 1 of 36 , Apr 27, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "hb3g@..." <hb3g@...> wrote:

      "If time is the transcendental horizon of being, then being itself is never completed. Therefore, being cannot be a being in-itself. The only thing left for being to be, then, is a being for-itself."

      Hb3g, I understand the first and second sentence, but not the third. Is it possible to elaborate a bit? What I seem to see and experience is never being-for-itself but being-with-other, being merging and separating with other being. From the smallest particle to the entire known cosmos, everything flows in and out of everything. Attraction, repulsion, creation, annihilation. I don't know how this translates into politics, ethics, or any of our existential projects, but I see its potential to revolutionize. I think our modern society's obsession with communication subconsciously but honestly reflects our desire for connection regardless of its content. The meaning of the movement seems more significant than any given destination, which to me is not nihilism but opportunity to create new combinations of percepts and concepts. Mary

      "A single truth now occupies the mind:

      the smallest

      distance

      inexhaustible"

      From Rae Armantrout's 1978 "Extremeties"
    • Mary
      ... If time is the transcendental horizon of being, then being itself is never completed. Therefore, being cannot be a being in-itself. The only thing left
      Message 36 of 36 , Apr 27, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "hb3g@..." <hb3g@...> wrote:

        "If time is the transcendental horizon of being, then being itself is never completed. Therefore, being cannot be a being in-itself. The only thing left for being to be, then, is a being for-itself."

        Hb3g, I understand the first and second sentence, but not the third. Is it possible to elaborate a bit? What I seem to see and experience is never being-for-itself but being-with-other, being merging and separating with other being. From the smallest particle to the entire known cosmos, everything flows in and out of everything. Attraction, repulsion, creation, annihilation. I don't know how this translates into politics, ethics, or any of our existential projects, but I see its potential to revolutionize. I think our modern society's obsession with communication subconsciously but honestly reflects our desire for connection regardless of its content. The meaning of the movement seems more significant than any given destination, which to me is not nihilism but opportunity to create new combinations of percepts and concepts. Mary

        "A single truth now occupies the mind:

        the smallest

        distance

        inexhaustible"

        From Rae Armantrout's 1978 "Extremeties"
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.